logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 장흥지원 2018.11.15 2018고정26
폐기물관리법위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

B is a person who actually operates D, a general waste recycling business entity that mainly performs waste processing and sales business at the place of business located in the Seoul Southern-gun, and the defendant is a person who works for the head of the company in D.

1. The joint criminal waste treatment business operators of the defendant B and the defendant A shall keep wastes in an appropriate place, such as storage facilities within the permitted place of business, temporary storage facilities approved, etc., as prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Environment;

Nevertheless, the Defendant and B, from October 2017 to October 19 of the same year, had 224 to 256 tons of waste, such as waste lumber, waste plastics, waste fish nets, etc., located in the place of business of the said corporation D, E, an employee of the said corporation, move to the business site of the said corporation, 625, in the middle, south, west-gun, west-gun, west-gun, Inc., Inc., Ltd., located in the area of the said corporation, using a house-to-house vehicle, not a storage facility or an authorized temporary storage facility.

Accordingly, the defendant and B did not keep wastes in an appropriate place such as storage facilities or temporary storage facilities in the permitted place of business in collusion with the defendant and B violated the rules of the waste disposal business operator.

Summary of Evidence

1. Protocol concerning the examination of suspect B by the prosecution;

1. Each police statement made to F, G, and E;

1. On-the-spot photographs [the defendant was the birth of B, but he was only a daily allowance for the purpose of part-time employment in D Co., Ltd. and did not participate in this case.

However, according to the above evidence, the defendant, as a partner of B, who is the actual operator of D, is involved in the business of D as a director or vice president, and can be recognized as participating in the crime of this case. Thus, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 66 of the relevant Act concerning facts constituting an offense and Article 66 of the Waste Management Act that selects punishment;

arrow